I guess what’s good enough for Linux is good enough for anything 🙂

However one interprets the data, however, the clear winner over the past two years has been Git. Almost half of the total change over the past two years is Git alone. If you’re looking for bets, then, based on this slice of version control system usage, DVCS generally and Git specifically would be the most obvious.

via Centralized vs Decentralized Version Control: 2010 vs 2012.

One Response to “Centralized vs Decentralized Version Control: 2010 vs 2012”

  1. mirabilos Says:

    You can’t compare centralised VCS with DVCS, as they have different markets / target groups.
    Sure, many people would fare better with a DVCS and are switching now, as there was none usable for them when they started, but that’s not saying there’s no use for a nōn-distributed VCS any more. (And the one to rock them all is CVS, *not* Subversion, which is pretty obsolete now, being only used as crutch and as common repository storage format for bzr/git/hg users, which have direct DVCS-to-DVCS gateways nowadays.)

    Oh, and: git is not a (D)VCS. It’s a “stupid content tracker” (O-Ton Linus) and a patch management system. It behaves somewhat SCMish, sure…